References
- American Polygraph Association (2011), ‘Report of the Ad Hoc Committee on validated techniques’. Polygraph, 40(4), 196–305.
- Ginton, A. (2009), ‘Relevant Issue Gravity (RIG) Strength – a New Concept in PDD that Reframes the notion of Psychological Set and the Role of Attention in CQT Poly-graph Examinations’. Polygraph, 38, 204–217.
- Ginton, A. (2015), ‘Good intentions that fail to cope with the main point in CQT: a comment on Palmatier and Rovner’. International Journal of Psychophysiology, 95, 25–28. DOI: 10.1016/j.ijpsycho.2014.09.005.10.1016/j.ijpsycho.2014.09.00525264350
- Ginton, A. (2017), ‘Examining different types of comparison questions in a field study of CQT polygraph technique. Theoretical and practical implications’. Journal of Investigative Psychology and Offender Profiling, 14, pp. 1–13. DOI: 10.1002/jip.147.10.1002/jip.147
- Honts, C.R. (2004), The psychophysiological detection of deception, [in:] Granhag, P. and Stromwall, L. (eds.), Detection of Deception in Forensic Contexts, Cambridge University Press, pp. 103–123.10.1017/CBO9780511490071.005
- Horvath, F.S. (1977), ‘The effect of selected variables on interpretation of polygraph records’. Journal of Applied Psychology, 62, 127–136.10.1037/0021-9010.62.2.127
- Iacono, W. G., & Ben-Shakhar, G. (2019), ‘Current status of forensic lie detection with the comparison question technique: An update of the 2003 National Academy of Sciences report on polygraph testing’. Law and H uman Behavior, 43, 86–98.10.1037/lhb000030730284848
- Kircher, J.C., Horowitz, S.W., and Raskin, D.C. (1988), ‘Meta-analysis of mock crime studies of the control question polygraph technique’. Law and Human Behavior, 12, 79–90.10.1007/BF01064275
- Krapohl, D.J., and Shaw, P.K. (2015), Fundamentals of Polygraph Practice, Elesvier Inc., Academic Press, San-Diego, Ca, USA.10.1016/B978-0-12-802924-4.00005-0
- National Research Council, (2003), The Polygraph and Lie Detection, National Academies Press, Washington, D.C.
- Nelson, R. (2011), ‘Monte Carlo Study of Criterion Validity for Two-Question Zone Comparison Tests with the Empirical Scoring System, Seven Position, and Th ree-Position Scoring Models’. Polygraph, 40, 146–156.
- Nelson, R., and Handler, M. (2008), ‘Brute-Force Comparison: A Monte Carlo Study of the Objective Scoring System version 3 (OSS-3) and Human Polygraph Scorers’. Polygraph, 37, 185–205.
- Raskin, D.C., Honts, C.R., Nelson, R., and Handler, M. (2015), ‘Monte Carlo Estimates of the Validity of Four Relevant Question Polygraph Examinations’. Polygraph, 44, 1–27.
- Raskin, D.C., and Kircher, J.C. (2014), Validity of Polygraph Techniques and Decision Methods, [in:] Raskin, D.C., Honts, C.R., and Kircher, J.C. (eds.), Credibility Assessment; Scientific Research and Applications, Elsevier Academic Press, San Diego.10.1016/B978-0-12-394433-7.00003-8
- Shterzer G. & Elaad E. (1985), Validity of the control question test in two levels of the severity of crimes. Proceedings of IDENTA-’85, [in:] Anti-Terrorism; Forensic Science; Psychology in Police Investigations (pp. 155–166). Jerusalem, Israel.10.4324/9780429036590-17
- Vrij, A. (2008), Detecting Lies and Deceit, Pitfalls, and Opportunities, Wiley and Sons, 2nd ed., Chichester, England.